Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-03-15
1OTHER LOCAL on THIRD PAGE.
Mr.. Guv and the Coroner,s Fee

Mr.. Guy and the COrOner's Fees.
To the Editor Of tae dispatch:
II Mr.. Guy Will make his calculations on
the assumption that year contains twelve
months aud not thirteen, and admit that pay
TO the morgue servant is not pay TO the
Coroner, be will find that the Coroner's
fees for 1856 amount to 81, ,295, as hereto.
fore stated. II be will refer to the Coro-
ner's bill for February, 1881, be will find 1t
TO I've for e10. II TO the bill for October,
1884, he will hrd 1t to be for $50. Other
bills for amounts approximating to these
can be found by looking for them.
From Mr.. Guys amounts for the past five
years should be deducted the pay Of the
morgue servant and the incidental expenses
incurred for transporting bodies to their
homes or to the morgue-these items being
in no sense part Of the Cor0ner's pay.
But, taking his own figures, my pay has
FOR that period been at the rate Of little
under S120 a month. Mr.. Guy himself adj
miis that this Is not too much, and so,
think. will any competent and candid per-
son who acquaints himself with the nature
Of the work have 10 do; and so, indeed,
has the City Council itself decided, when
on several occasions heretofore statesmen
have conceived the idea Of building the
City Hall. wipiDg out the debt, and in
creasng every body else's pay by decreasing
that OF The CorsHer.
As to "unknown infants" - that Is, new
born children thrown away-there is sbsO.
iuiely no way TO answer the all-important
question whether the child bad ever
6reathed except by poSt.mortem exami-
nation, and Il certainly would be neglect
I,sfx Il ~ NJ
tions. Suppose | were to omit the post
mortem In case and next day the mother
was arrested and stood charged with mur-
der-and the killing OF an infant Is muir
der, as Mr. Guy knows-wbat excuse
could give for not knowing whether the
child had llyedi The post nOrtemS cost
S25 each; but then the examination OF an
adult body which has been soaking for
three months In the dock-a horrible kind
OF work, such as | had to do last week
costs but IS, and II Is the aggregation OF
the fees for cases between such extremes
us these which makes up the Sl20 month,
which Mr. Guy agrees is not too much.
do not understand what 1t II that Mr..
Guy expects a represt native OF the city TO
DO when | ON about TO swear in court to
the correctness OF my account. The repre-
sentatives Of the city, including Mr.. Guy,
have eyerv one Of my bills before them foe
examination, and linger over them some'
times for months before r.;,ns them.
md although this has been going on Tor
nearly fifteen years, and maIedlctions have
often been showered upon their totals,
have never heard that single item in any
one Of them was found TO be improperly
charged.
I Go not object 10 Mr.. Guys plsn for pay.
ing the Coroner, nor do | object TO the use
Of the amounts OF my bills for enforcing
bis arguments. But let him use his own
average OF t120 a month, which Is, | be-
heye, approximately correct. He does not
treat me altogether fairly when be empha.
sizes the s20ooi January, 1887, and ignores
the $40 Of october, 1884.
Respectfully, WILLIAM II. TAYLOR.